In 1997, the pol, of course, was Bill Clinton and the tainted money came from folks such as John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung and Pauline Kanchanalak. A decade later, it's Hillary Rodham Clinton's turn to write refund checks to deflect attention from a bundler named Norman Hsu. Few American political families in modern times have proved as adept at raising money -- or as practiced at the art of giving it back if it comes with too much baggage.

The eerie echoes of the last Clinton campaign finance scandal are what make the Hsu case so problematic for the current Democratic presidential frontrunner. If it were just a matter of the facts of this particular case, it might be the sort of bad-news story that comes and goes, forgotten long before anyone shows up at a ballot box to case a vote. After all, Hsu also raised money for other Democrats as well, including Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.). But none of them has the same history to overcome.

The Hsu case illustrates the challenges for Hillary Clinton in defining her past. She has to this point managed to use her time as first lady and her marriage to a former president popular within her party ranks to her advantage while largely scrubbing those eight years in the White House of the more controversial chapters. The disputes that dogged her in the 1990s -- Whitewater, cattle futures, the White House travel office, Vincent Foster -- have been absent from the campaign trail this time, as have memories of the many issues that her husband had to contend with, including campaign finances.

The Hsu case has nothing to do with those episodes in a direct sense, of course. An apparel manufacturer in New York, he grew up in Hong Kong before moving to the United States in 1969 to attend college and eventually raised money for Sen. John F. Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 before joining the Clinton team this time. When a 15-year-old arrest warrant from an investment fraud conviction emerged, he failed to appear at a hearing and was later caught in Colorado.

After the Los Angeles Times reported that the FBI was looking into a Hsu business venture in which investors were pressed to contribute to Clinton, the campaign took a page straight from the 1990s playbook -- it decided to return the $850,000 Hsu had raised, then tipped off a couple reporters late on a day dominated by testimony by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the Iraq commander.

The case evokes the fundraising scandals born out of Bill Clinton's reelection in 1996, which dominated Washington for more than a year after the vote as one unseemly tale after another emerged about White House fundraising tactics and the characters trying to buy access through questionable if not illegal methods.

The president used the White House to stroke donors in a more methodical way than any of his predecessors had ever done, inviting hundreds of top contributors and politically connected people to attend coffees with him in the executive mansion or even to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom. ("Ready to start overnights right away," Clinton wrote on a fundraising memo.) Vice President Al Gore made fundraising calls from his office and attended a fundraiser at a Buddhist temple where nuns who had taken vows of poverty were illegally reimbursed for $2,500 contributions.

The Clinton team ended up sending back millions of dollars as the revelations widened. John Huang, a Democratic National Committee fundraiser, raised $3.4 million for the party and its campaign, but nearly half of it had to be returned because of questions about the donors, including some from overseas. Huang was the one who organized the Gore event at the Hsi Lai Temple outside Los Angeles that brought in $140,000, most of which had to be given back.

The DNC also returned $253,000 donated by businesswoman Pauline Kanchanalak after she said the money came from her mother-in-law and $366,000 to Johnny Chung, who told investigators a Chinese military officer had given him hundreds of thousands of dollars to funnel to the Democrats. The Clinton legal defense fund refunded or refused to accept at least $640,000 from Charlie Trie, a businessman who showed up one day with two manila envelopes filled with checks.

Hillary Clinton was caught up in the scandals to some degree. At one point, it emerged that Chung had delivered $50,000 directly to the first lady's chief of staff, Maggie Williams, at the White House. Williams forwarded the check to the DNC, even though federal law bars officials from receiving political donations on government property.

Much of the money was aimed at buying access. Roger Tamraz, a Lebanese-American oil financier, openly admitted that he gave $300,000 to advance his plans to build a $2.5 billion oil pipeline and said he gladly would have given twice as much. Chung, who parlayed his generosity into 49 visits to the White House to further his interests with foreign business clients even though the National Security Council had warned that he was a "hustler," provided perhaps the most memorable line of the scandal, explaining his actions by saying: "The White House is like a subway. You have to put in coins to open the gates."

As it happens, Hillary Clinton is not the only candidate running for president now who had a role in the 1990s drama that might hurt today. Former senator Fred Thompson (Tenn.), who just jumped into the Republican race, was the chairman of the Senate committee that investigated the fundraising abuses, but came under withering criticism from fellow Republicans for being too evenhanded and not aggressive enough in attacking Democrats.

"Why would you imply the Hsu case causes a problem for Hillary? How many others will follow her lead?

Posted by: julieo | September 11, 2007 11:35 AM"

You are exceedingly naive or a Hillary plant.

Norman Hsu is also a major donor to Bubba's NGO, the Clinton Global Initiative.

Neither Clinton can dissociate from Hsu, but they will certainly try. They will attempt a second Peter Paul. You know - they associate freely with felons, then when caught, they deny relationship or knowledge.

I worry about the sheer stupidity of my party in hiding their heads in the sand with Hillary. they know she is corrupt, that their is alot of baggage that will be brought back out if she is our nominee and the embarrassment and corruption will begin again.
Why democrats stubbornly want to romanticize the 90s and forget how the Clinton's treated us and threw our party under the bus for their own gains, is beyond me.
How can they willingly decide to have selective memory, ignore the ugly little facts that keep dripping out and the obvious about the Clintons, is sheer foolishness.
There will continue to be more embarrassing things that keep coming out about Hillary and of course, the sheep in my party will believe the lies she peddles and blindly follow her to disaster.
Of course, all the red flags and warning signs they choose to ignore along the way.
I wonder how much they will be all misty over the Clintons when they find out Billary have been selling their jobs overseas for quite some time.

For certain, there must be so much more corruption and dishonesty that the Clintons are trying to hide by buying people out and hiding documents so Hillary Clinton appears what it is hard for her to hide. I hope voters finally see what she represents and all the baggage she has that will always interfere with whatever she does the rest of her life. This is what she highlights as "35 years of experience," which should disqualify her from any governmental position. It would be a nightmare for Americans to see more Clintons in the White House.
People need to start seeing the old Establishment as a rotten broken system that needs to be changed for good things to happen in favor to all citizens. We all need to see things differently now and vote for the most qualified candidate. Hillary Clinton is only a patcher. She does not think nor care about the consequences in a long term. She wants to be back, to patch things more so she could continue there for eternity, making false promises while we continue with the same problems for more years to come. The Clintons want to continue working within the same rotten and broken reality. They have boxed themselves in the corruption and dishonesty that have reigned in this country for so long.

"People, whether you agree with their policies or not, like John Edwards, Barak Obama, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi are all genuine, honest-to-god patriots."???????????????? THEY'RE PART OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT... THEY !!!ARE!!! THE!!! PROBLEM!!!

It's good to know that Mrs. Bill Clinton, as her husband did before her, likes to lean on Chinese benefactors. Perhaps the tainted China products flooding our market will be a forgone conclusion once Hillary becomes President? "Lead paint poisoning our children, what lead paint? I do not recall..."

Maybe as Commander-in-Chief, she'll go on pardoning as her husband did, the ChiComs who illegally acquired from the Clinton's biggest fundraiser, satellite navigation GPS technology to better pinpoint the Chinese nuclear arsenal on our cities and help them destroy satellites too.

It's really pathetic when the Clinton apologists appeal to George W. as a comparison to make her look "good". Look people, Hillary and Bill Clinton are crooked opportunists. So is George W. and Cheney and Kennedy and Romney. The are money grubbing hacks that have the morals of Piranas in a feeding frenzy. The will NEVER represent YOU or me, they only will represent the corporate swine that provide the feed that goes in their trough. This is especially sad becasue it doesn't have to be this way. There is no excuse for us to put up with these frauds. There are decent men and women in public service that genuinely care about this country, more than they care about anything. People, whether you agree with their policies or not, like John Edwards, Barak Obama, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi are all genuine, honest-to-god patriots. But who are the front runners, the leaders oin the Presidential race right now? Hillary Clinton, Guiliani and Romney! It's enough to make a maggot vomit. What a suicidal bunch of twits we have become.

Mark, give up on Dan3 - hysteria serves as his common sense. And, don't give in so easily on an Iraq-9/11 connection. Many of the Left-Wing fringe and Old Media completely gloss over the fact that much of the Oil-For-Food billion$ Saddam raked in (let's see, on whose watch...?) poured through his coffers into front companies set up by, among others... you guessed it... al-Qaeda. THAT'S a matter of public record, much of which was gleaned from none other than that HUGELY "successful" global cash cow (known as the UN) records!

(Dan3's group would no doubt have us believe THAT Iraq contribution to al-Qaeda was used by UBL, et al, to build schools for the little Muslim kiddies... weelll, at least for the little boy kiddies.... but we know differently: Al-Qaeda doesn't build schools, they blow them up.)

For confirmation of Dan3's poor command of history (or facts), that 'embarassingly lame dribble' remark (over Sandy B'urgla'r record-stealing escapades at the National Archives) should give you a clue. Covering up their pathetic '90s appeasement to an Islamo-Fascist group that caused 3000 to die on 9/11 - to me - is no lame dribble.

Worrying more about the 'Wm Jefferson Clinton legacy' than what's best to keep Americans safe is no lame dribble.

Taking ChiCom cash from the very nation that supports terrorism by supporting Iran is no lame dribble.

There's something extremely despicable about those who can claim a moral equivalence between a sad personal drama like "Foleygate" and the animals that caused hundreds to leap to their death from the World Trade Center buildings to escape the flames on Sept 11th, 2001. Yet someone like Dan3 has the gall to question another's moral fiber? The irony drips......

That's why you need not worry about Dan3 - he has NOTHING other than vitriol and hysteria. Comparing someone's sexual peccadilloes to matters of national security - or mass murder of innocent civilans (on this day, especially) - isn't new to these type of dimwit people... seems like it was done a lot in the '90s. They're just staying true to form.

I say to anyone out there: hate George W. all you want, but at least we're killing terrorists now, instead of cowering under the Oval Office desk with a blue dress and cigar while al-Qaeda attacks unabated.

I am an Independent. I can't stand the Clintons. I can't stand Bush. I look at the lists comparing the failings of both parties and I'm aghast. Which leaves me in a big dilemma. I am going to vote for somebody who is not a member of the Federal Government. And it's not a matter of party lines, either, for in the Fed Govm't they scream at each other by day and party together at night. The only options I see are Richardson, Romney, and Giuliani. I firmly believe there's nobody else that has any hope of solving our problems. That's why it's rare for a former senator or congressman to be elected president because there's a definite conflict of interest. And of the three outsiders I've mentioned, I'll put them in order of preference: Romney first, Giuliani second, then Richardson. None of the others come close; all the others are unacceptable.

All Hillary lovers out there. She ONLY gave the money back because she got CAUGHT. Typical Clinton behavior. I can't believe ANYONE would want 4 years of this crap. And WHY won't she give out the names of her other bundlers? Maybe they are doing the same thing? Hmmm?

dan3
I'm not arguing about W, I'm talking about the Clinton "error". But as far as W being the worst president, I think Lyndon Johnson's presidency - Vietnam - tops this war any day. There is absolutely no comparison between Iraq and Nam. Johnson cost this country 58000 plus in the same time that we have lost 3000 plus. Every sole lost is a tragedy, but Johnson by far was the worst ever. And you are right 911 has nothing to do with Iraq and I didn't mention Iraq did I? all that i said which you did not refute, was because Clinton was so preoccupied with his Interns and all of the other scandals he let these terrorists plan the greatest attack in America's history.

dan3, how convenient to bash the Republican party. The new President hits office in 2001 and the first thing that hits him in the face is the dot.com bubble burst. The financial world goes into a tailspin. It's easy to reduce the National Debt when you overinflate the Stock Exchange and stock prices are soaring. Whoever invested early and got out before the crash made millions.

The next thing is the bombing on America soil. Clinton had opportunity after opportunity to get bin Ladin, but chose not to do so. This caused a domino effect throughout the world.

I also find it funny how the Democratic party is out to help the poverty class in the nation, but in the same breath, want to give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Who will this help? The poor will lose jobs or be forced to take reduced pay to keep their jobs. The middle and upper class will be imposed tax increases to subsidize the "new citizens" and all politicians will continue to pay no taxes on their income/lobby money.

Wow...the vitriol directed against a Christian woman by red blooded (Christian?) Americans is the greatest scandal!
MarkUSAF - where to start? He not only fails to cite references for most of his claims re: the Clintons, but the ones he does cite do NOT involve "friends and associates". Campaign fundraisers are myriad and are hardly friends and barely associates. Here are the facts; ONE member of the Clinton administration went to jail, Webb Hubbel, and that was for actions committed prior to and having nothing to do with the Clinton administration. As for Mike Espy, I have news for you: "Espy Acquitted in Gifts Case" - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/counsels/stories/espy120398.htm

Insofar as there have been only three presidential impeachments (and 2 went to Senate trial), what is this trumpeting of the "ONLY" president to be impeached for "personal malfeasance"? Sounds like Clinton's lies are more important to Mike than Nixon's use of the CIA to block an FBI investigation, or Ronald Regan's "I know in my head" violation of the Constitution in circumventing the Boland amendment.

Oh, Mike, I'm with you on Clinton's deserving to be disbarred, and to pay a fine, even if the SEXUAL HARRASSMENT CASE WAS THROWN OUT OF COURT! But you are wrong on the so-called rape accusation: he was not the first President to be accused of it by a woman, and he certainly was not accused of it even by the rabid Ken Starr. And if you want to say Mrs. Clinton was under criminal investigation during the Starr Crusade, well pal that doesn't mean poop. Or rather, it does mean poop because that's pretty much what Starr and the GOP did: throw enough of it and some will stick.
As for the Clinton Legal Defense funds - What a horror! They had legal bills of $4 million dollars at the time, and the result of the $50 million Starr investigation was Clinton's fine for contempt in the Paula Jones DISMISSED sexual harrasment case, and his fine and disbarment resulting from a questionable accusation that he lied to the Grand Jury.
I know there's no reasoning with an irrational partisan, but Mike (USAF notwithstanding) if you really believe all the crap you listed, then I know of a bridge in Baghdad you might want to consider buying.

My point is that W has set the bar so low for what constitutes a competent president that I can't believe anybody still GARA about decade-old "Klinton" pseudo-scandals. Real people are really dead, Iraq is the worst mistake this country ever made and our president is the reason and people are actually worried about Hilary's campaign donors? Keep your eye on the ball, people, there's a war (Bush started) on...

Why my fellow Dems would want this flawed woman is beyond my ability to figure out. Yes, the GOP has always had the worst crooks, yet the President Clintons have always had a dangerously close relationship with Chinese lobbyists. So I have never been able to see how Dems want anyone who smells of corruption like Hillary

chashawkins can you recall exactly when your last moral fiber died? Whas it a conscious decision to support, excuse, and enable failure? You are like a brownshirt of the nazi era ignoring and excusing destructive fascist actions. No other President has lost two wars simultaneously but all you can muster is some embarrassingly lame dribble about Sandy berger? LOL.

I enjoyed your comical retort but if you had read my posts you would see I am no Shillary supporter. There are still some 'real' Americans who hold their government accountable instead of carry their water and drink their kool-aid.

It speaks volumes of your intellectual and moral defecits that you can scan over the damning list of ethical and illegal actions of this admin and yawn. No problems if you have no scruples or ethics. You and the bottom 28% of the American bell curve are true traitors endorsing torture, illegal wiretapping, and subversion of the constitution...something OBL could never have achieved.

Oh my god, its like deja vu all over again.. The bad memories start a streamin out of my mind and I recall how much disappointment and sorrow I felt at the tribulations caused by Bill Clinton. For a man with such outsized ambitions and talents he blew it away. Now I have to relive this again with his wife? Na UH, not me, I am tired of this scandal plagued blind ambition, its time for some clean new young blood in American politics, is there anyone out there listening to us American constituents? WE WANT CLEAN INTENTIONS AND NOT BLIND AMBITION!

MarkUSFAG your list is laughable and demonstrates your devoid objective intellect as if you can compare the National Disgrace and Failure of Bush to Clinton. Overlooking the dissertation that can be done to the better economy, jobs, growth under Clinton vs 3.5 TRILLION added to national debt under bush. There is no refuting bush is a failure on the GWOT. OBL FREE = HISTORICAL COLLOSSAL FAILURE. Your lame list ommits the factual evidence what Clinton accomplished to your failure in chief.

COMPARE CLINTON TO BUSH

CLINTON Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.

-- Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.

-- Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. 9/11 on Bush watch even after being warned on August PDB OBL DETERMINED TO STRIKE INSIDE THE US.

If this Hsu scandal didn't come to light, Clinton would have swept all of this under the carpet and noone would have known. She broke all the rules of accepting campaign money. Hsu donated $23,000 to the Clinton campaign, which exceeds the amount allowed by a factor of 10. She knows the rules and still accepted the gift.

Now she says that she is giving back the money to 260 donors and they can contribute in their name if they choose. Well, most of these people have been reimbursed by Hsu, so this is free income to them. They will have no problem giving it back to her, since there isn't any cash effect to them. Plus, they will give because it was the wishes of "their buddy".

To make an excuse that she didn't know what problems Hsu had personally is just irresponsible. I guess she used the same lame excuse when she was tied into the Whitewater scandal. You would think people would learn.

As for the people who want to twist this into a Republican/Democratic thing, wake the heck up. What she did was wrong and she should be held accountable for her actions.

Hillary Clinton is going to be the next President of the United States and will do great things for the USA and the world. The Democratic Party will further strengthen their control of Congress. The American people are fed up with the Bush Administration and the destruction it has inflicted on our great country and the world.

I note that the Clinton Haters' lists of "Clinton Scandals" are no longer limited to this one issue -- campaign donor scandals.

I see that the Clinton Haters include the entire kitchen sink of Clinton "sins" -- any hints, any rumors, any accusations, and any investigations into anything even remotely illegal, immoral, or even just plain silly (like impeaching a twice-elected POTUS for nine bj's and watching his approval ratings sky-rocket).

My list sticks to scandalous Republican donors.
And then it is further limited to one scandalous Republican donor.

I don't see this story hurting Hillary very much. The public is well aware of the long history of the Clinton's illegal campaign contributions. This new development is not exactly shocking. Hillary's supporters don't care about corruption and the rest of the public doesn't need to be reminded.

I simply do not understand this type of coverage in the days since Jack Abramoff.

What has Hillary Clinton actually done here that's illegal or even immoral?

Is it that she didn't know that the state of CA had a warrant out for this guy's arrest... even though it appears the state of CA didn't know it either?

FACT: The "Clinton Scandals" were an invention of the Clinton Haters.

Yes, there were scandals -- zillions. But what was the result?
Baloney Sandwiches!

(And please leave any "scandals" off the list that involve the words "perjury" or "obstruction of justice" or "sexual affair" -- it appears that Republicans now consider those excusable offenses instead of impeachable offenses.)

The Clinton Haters can invent a Clinton Scandal just from a questionable rumor put out by Fox Noise.

The biggest fundraising scandal of my lifetime (58 years old) is still on-going! And it involves a REPUBLICAN who was sooooo obviously guilty that he was actually charged, indicted and convicted by a politically corrupt REPUBLICAN Justice Dept.

This Republican donor sang enough to put a few Republicans in jail, end the political careers of a few others, and add to the GOP Thumpin' in 2006.
And this Republican donor had his donations given to charity by the sitting President of the United States, also a history-making prolific fund-raising politician.
And this Republican donor IS STILL SINGING!

Where is the continued coverage of the on-going Jack Abramoff story?
Or would the MSM actually have to make some phone calls, instead of just sitting around drinking coffee, playing solitaire, and waiting for faxes from the RNC?

While this fund raising snafu has no direct connection to past fund raising problems, the question has to be why Hillary hadn't been doing criminal checks BEFORE the Hsu fund raising, given what she knew could happen.

Leaders who don't learn from major past mistakes shouldn't be rewarded with the presidency.

You go get them commies. If you can't find any actual ones, just go ahead and make sh-t up.

It is hard to control where the money comes from when you have to raise so much. How much "influence" does $500,000 really buy? Okay, so she'll meet with the guy, but that doesn't mean she'll go down on him. Sex is a useful euphemism for government contracts

That was always the important piece that is missing from newspaper pieces like this one - and so many others. Getting a meeting is not closing a sale. Most of these guys are wasting a ton of money just to get the meeting.

It's cheaper to buy a Congressman than a President and a whole lot more effective.

WOW... Dan3, lots of rage there.. watch the blood pressure. (Were you the guy I passed at Starbucks today, with bulging veins popping from your forehead, mumbling into your latte?)

List what you want... it can't come close to selling out your country to ChiComs for cash donations, or dodging your Zipper-King's leadership incompetence by sending Sandy B'urgla'r into the National Archives for a little history scrubbing after totally ignoring Islamo-Fascism and leaving our country susceptible to a 9-11 attack. (And before you start the knee-jerk 'mumbling' about "on W's watch", remember that a Democrat Congress didn't confirm all of W's cabinet apptmnts until just a month or two before it all went down - or was W supposed to run the entire country without Lieutenants?)

FUNNY, how everyone misses the real point. As the wife of a former US President, isn't Hillary protected 24/7 by Secret Service? And isn't part of their job to perform background checks on those close to HRC? Many photo-ops prove Hsu was buzzing around the Hillary-pile for YEARS. And wouldn't a background check have - oh, I don't know - found a CA WARRANT outstanding for 'Citizen' Hsu? She's about as 'surprised' at this bundling scandal as she was about Bill's lies over who was sleeping in his Oval Office....., OR WHAT WAS FOUND STICKING TO SANDY'S FINGERS! She is a true icon of the Left, and their slogan remains - 'That which does not stick to us makes us slicker'. Democrats must be SOOOO proud.

The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses:15
- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6
- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million
- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million
As of June 2000, the Justice Department listed 25 people indicted and 19 convicted because of the 1996 Clinton-Gore fundraising scandals.

- According to the House Committee on Government Reform in September 2000, 79 House and Senate witnesses asserted the Fifth Amendment in the course of investigations into Gore's last fundraising campaign.
-James Riady entered a plea agreement to pay an $8.5 million fine for campaign finance crimes. This was a record under campaign finance laws.
Number of times John Huang took the 5th Amendment in answer to questions during a Judicial Watch deposition: 1,000
- Visits made to the White House by investigation subjects Johnny Chung, James Riady, John Huang, and Charlie Trie. 160
- Number of campaign contributors who got overnights at the White House in the two years before the 1996 election: 577
- Number of members of Thomas Boggs's law firm who have held top positions in the Clinton administration. 18
- Number of times John Huang was briefed by CIA: 37
- Number of calls Huang made from Commerce Department to Lippo banks: 261
- Number of intelligence reports Huang read while at Commerce Department: 500

I know it's asking a lot of a bunch of leftoids, but it would be possible for the post to once write an article that doesn't have a subtle, or frequently, not so subtle, slam on Republicans? i.e. ..."Thompson"..."came under withering criticism from fellow Republicans for being too evenhanded". To the average democrat WaPo reader who doesn't understand what I'm talking about, Mr. Baker is suggesting that Republicans consider "evenhandedness" to be a weakness deserving of "withering criticism". No bias here!

Go ahead Democrats, sing your songs of praise for Senator Clinton regardless of her dealings, and nominate her as your candidate for President. That will assure America spends another four years under a Republican administration!

I am an independent voter who voted for Kerry in 2004. I know many independents from the Independence Party in my state.

Suffice it to say, there are other viable Democrats seeking the Democratic nomination. My advice is to look at them more closely with an eye towards "electability".

I hope that members of the press will NOT let this story end here. Please continue to investigate the Clinton campaign. Let us know to what charity illegally received money is contributed and PLEASE get a list of to whom the Hsu money is *returned*. I do not trust the Clintons. There have been far too many times that they claim to have *returned the money* or *furnishings* or whatever they have obtained illegally. No one else would have been afforded this privilege.

Clinton may anger the American Taliban by publicly breast feeding but the Waste Management Mafia clandestinely kills people. Fall Guy Jack Abramoff can tell you all about it; Just piece together the shredded White House visitor's records:

Does anyone remember Janet Reno's investigation into the Clintons' illegal compaign contributions in the '90s? She declared that although the Clintons broke campaign laws, it wasn not *intentional* (in her opinion) so announced that there was no need for further investigation. NO ONE complained because the economy was thought to be in good shape. Of course, that bubble, too, began to burst at the end of the Clinton administration because it, too, was based on false numbers. The Clintons are dishonest, have always been dishonest,and always will be dishonest.

China's efforts amount to a worldwide "market intelligence program," says former FBI analyst Paul D. Moore. "The reality is that China does not practice intelligence the way God intended," he jokes. America's intelligence structure arose during the Cold War to contain the Soviet Union. "In our model, professional intelligence officers go out and do the job," Moore says. "In China's model, anyone and everyone is a potential intelligence asset."

The system is chaotic and inefficient but also highly effective. According to Moore and others, it relies on "guanxi," a system of social networking with deep cultural significance. "The process for finding the best restaurant in Seattle is exactly the same as finding out what nuclear technology America has," Moore says. "You ask your friends. Eventually, you're introduced to someone who can help."

Guanxi could explain why Chi Mak, a naturalized American citizen who spent years as a naval engineer for U.S. defense contractors, finds himself in jail, accused of secretly working for the Chinese government. "When someone reaches out to you," Moore says, "it can be very hard to say no."

According to a 42-page FBI affidavit, Mak was the lead engineer on a highly sensitive U.S. naval project: the Quiet Electric Drive. The FBI says it recorded Mak copying Navy secrets, and later found Chinese-language wish lists in his home that included propulsion and command-and-control technology.
This is from an article in Popular Mechanics Aug 2006

She is from Illinois. They are all prolific liars who have no values and there are no norms except get what money you can anyway you can. The biggest mistake this country could make is to let her in OUR WHITE HOUSE!!!!

Here is a good answer for all of you I don't care no more GOP for a long time they did this to America divided it so badly that it will take years to get back to normal if it ever can.

So please save your insults America is tried of the lies and the wars and the killing where corporations have more rights and freedoms then Americans.

So stow your insults for another day because like it or not Bill Clinton won and legaly won twice with the majority of Americans feeling good about themselves instead of scared. Enough is enough your lies will fall on deaf ears this time around.

In 1996 Pres Clinton approved launches of satellites by the Chinese, this amidst huge fundraising efforts with more Chinese fellows.Oh , these were American sats with special components, it is alleged by some that the Chinese intentionally aborted a launch to secure a special component, which was not found amongst the wreckage. This component is important for targeting,they didn't have the technology then , they do now. Is 1996 considered ancient history?http://www.fas.org/news/china/1998/h980618-prc8.htm

Why would you imply the Hsu case causes a problem for Hillary? She's giving the money back - getting rid of dirty money. She demonstrates leadership in this action. It's no problem at all. How many others will follow her lead?

Quite frankly, I Have long thought Mr Hsu to be an agent of Chinese intelligence. We scramble to chase Russian Bear Bombers(yawn) yet do nothing to stem the full court press of the Chinese. Do your own research, I have and find the level of penetration to be very high. There is no country on earth working harder than the Chinese, while we are looking the other way. Many have complete families still in China. I have noticed this recently, in wedding announcements. Born there , educated here , marries here, gets job at Lab , sends Mom & dad home with CD full of submarine design data. Thats just one folks. The Pentagon just announced the Chinese army was nosing around our computer network. Let the aging Bears drift by, lets get focused.

Any disparaging or views you incompetent amoral failures mumble is laughable as you and your impotent corrupt party has lost any and all credibility. Shut your traps and get out of the way as you have left a horrendous mess for us to clean up.

Many of the Democrats, including Bill and Hillary, are former College Communists who retain a "Post-Soviet" outlook. You can see and hear it in the current Crocker-Petraeus Hearings not to speak of the obscene Moveon.org ad in the NY Times, a form of Communist distortion. Because by nature Communists are criminals, the historical Clinton scandals and, now, Hillary's with Mr. Hsu should be taken as the norm for them. Perhaps the media wants this but is this what America wants?